Canon 17-40L vs Tamron 17-50 (non-VC)

Gromit

Wammer
Wammer
Nov 17, 2006
7,608
7,056
158
Yellowbellyshire
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
That's not really a misprint (and I don't think I've quite lost my marbles...yet) but I remember Paul (pac67) speaking very highly of the older Tamron 17-50, and reading online tests - particularly the very thorough ones in Photzone.de - it would appear this is one seriously good bit of glass and 100% backs up Paul's opinion.

Bearing in mind it's possible to pick up good used ones for not much over 200 quid (and from dealers for £250ish with warranty) I'm giving some thought to doing the unthinkable - selling my 17-40L, buying the Tamron and then releasing funds into a super wide-angle (Sigma 10-24 perhaps) or the Canon EF-S 10-22.

I admit it's all very well reading online lens reviews (admittedly then can be more objective than hifi reviews) but does anyone have personal epxerience of the 17-50? Thanks. :)

 

Gromit

Wammer
Wammer
Nov 17, 2006
7,608
7,056
158
Yellowbellyshire
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Thanks Steve - looks like that little Canon 10-22 is a bit of a peach, will keep an eye out for one. :)

 
G

Guest

Guest
Thanks Steve - looks like that little Canon 10-22 is a bit of a peach, will keep an eye out for one. :)
Wammers are world champions at spending other Wammers money, so......

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=139908

canon-10-22mm-IMG_1557.jpg


 

Gromit

Wammer
Wammer
Nov 17, 2006
7,608
7,056
158
Yellowbellyshire
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Hi RichardI have the Tamron 17-50 lens on my Canon 400D and it's a cracker.

Best wishes

Ian
Thanks Ian - what you say does seem to be consistent amongst owners. To quote from the Photozone.de test, who aren't known for gushing over equipment in their reviews...

'At 17mm the lens was even able to reach some of the highest measured LW/PH values ever tested in the center of the image (@ f/4). Even wide open the quality is already very good. At 24mm the quality remains basically on the same high level. At 35mm and 50mm there's a really marginal decrease in center performance whereas the border quality remains exceptionally high'

Steve - think I'll drop Mark a pm on PFM. :)

 

Mr_Sukebe

Wammer
Wammer
Jan 19, 2009
758
6
33
London, , United Kin
AKA
Mike
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I've owned the Tammy 17-50, 28-75 and the Canon 17-40.

Personal view is that the Tammys were both nice and sharp, but someone the colour rendition on the Canon had more "pep", and when I say that, I found the difference to be quite large.

I only shifted on my 17-40 as I decided to go with just primes. Otherwise, I thought it was an excellent lens and preferred it to the Tammy.

 

Gromit

Wammer
Wammer
Nov 17, 2006
7,608
7,056
158
Yellowbellyshire
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Thanks Mike - good to get info from someone who's owned the whole lot. :)

Don't get me wrrong, I love my 17-40 - it's really given my life-long interest in photography (although it's a bit haphazard!) a shot in the arm. It does posess a pleasing richness in its colour presentation but doesn't over-egg the pudding. A bit like Kodachrome 25 there's something 'right' about it.

It looks like the non-VC Tamron is still available so might try and find a dealer who has one. Failing that they seem to be fairly common on eBay so could buy it, try it, sell it on if it doesn't suit.

 

macvisual

Wammer
Wammer
Mar 6, 2008
5,147
1,489
158
Scotland
AKA
Peter
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Richard;

You've got hit big time with the 'photographic bug', brilliant......!

The Tamron 17-50mm (non -VC), how fast is this lens..?

 

Gromit

Wammer
Wammer
Nov 17, 2006
7,608
7,056
158
Yellowbellyshire
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Richard;You've got hit big time with the 'photographic bug', brilliant......!

The Tamron 17-50mm (non -VC), how fast is this lens..?
Hi Pete - the Tamron's an f2.8 from start to finish. :)

As to the 'bug' I'm loving it! Got really into photography as a kid, in fact my dad spent a lot of time explaining how a lens works, the relationship between focal length vs aperture etc. Dad has a Masters degree in Chemistry so loves anything to do with science/maths etc. :)

Did p'tography as part of Art A-level, developing my own pictures, but lost interest a few years ago. Now, I'm just starting to re-kindle what I learnt and having lots of fun into the bargain. :)

 

tkimages

Wammer
Wammer
Jun 14, 2006
10,732
9,306
173
St Helens
AKA
Tillman
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Hi Pete - the Tamron's an f2.8 from start to finish. :) As to the 'bug' I'm loving it! Got really into photography as a kid, in fact my dad spent a lot of time explaining how a lens works, the relationship between focal length vs aperture etc. Dad has a Masters degree in Chemistry so loves anything to do with science/maths etc. :)

Did p'tography as part of Art A-level, developing my own pictures, but lost interest a few years ago. Now, I'm just starting to re-kindle what I learnt and having lots of fun into the bargain. :)
This is what I love to hear.

 

Gromit

Wammer
Wammer
Nov 17, 2006
7,608
7,056
158
Yellowbellyshire
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Bit of an update...

A friend of mine, clearly taking pity on me some time ago whilst I was 'lensless', let me borrow his spare Tokina AF193 19-35 zoom. I didn't use it an awful lot but it was there when needed. Anyway, I thought just for fun I'd pop it on the camera today and do a quick comparison against the Canon 17-40L.

Now, one should bear in mind that the Tokina sold for around 100 quid recently (it's now discontinued) but I'm simply amazed at what superb results it gives. I took some pictures of the front of our house this afternoon - in bright sunshine - and apart from the colours not being quite as rich as the Canon, the resolution of the Tokina is stunning. I'd even go as far as saying that in some respects it's better than the Canon. The detail on brickwork, for example is easily as good. Should add I was very careful to use the same exposure for both lenses.

Nice thing is that the Tokina is also FF compatible. Oh and it's built like a tank too. :)

 

macvisual

Wammer
Wammer
Mar 6, 2008
5,147
1,489
158
Scotland
AKA
Peter
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
"Nice thing is that the Tokina is also FF compatible".

That was my next question for you Richard, I must have a closer look at that Tokina AF193 19-35 zoom lens. Any pic's ?

Thanks;

pete

 

Gromit

Wammer
Wammer
Nov 17, 2006
7,608
7,056
158
Yellowbellyshire
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
That was my next question for you Richard, I must have a closer look at that Tokina AF193 19-35 zoom lens. Any pic's ?Thanks;

pete
Pete - I'll sort some photos out for you tomorrow and Flickr them up.

The Tokina is more fussy of lighting conditions than the 17-40L - the Canon just gets on with looking very good pretty much regardless of focusing distance/focal length/aperture/available light etc. In ideal conditions the Tokina is stunning. A mite soft in the corners when wide open, but down at f8 it's amazing - at all focal lengths. Would be worth bearing in mind that it probably wouldn't be as good on a FF body, which seems to be the case with many lenses.

The 193 I have here is one of the last ones made apparently, and doesn't have the separate aperture ring.

 

Gromit

Wammer
Wammer
Nov 17, 2006
7,608
7,056
158
Yellowbellyshire
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Ok, a few photos taken with each lens. Perhaps best to open each pair of photos in separate tabs. Sorry the framing isn't absolutely accurate but hopefully it'll give some idea as to how each len performs - shame also that the sun kept going in and out so quickly!

Tokina:



Canon:



Tokina:



Canon:



Tokina:



Canon:



Both lenses were wearing Hoya Skylight UV(B) filters, camera set to ISO200. Aperture was set to f9-10 or thereabouts.

 

peterh

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 20, 2005
1,585
15
68
Manchester, , United
AKA
Peter
That is a really interesting comparison. As a 17-40L user I am disappointed I spent as much as I did. That Tokina appears to be the match of the Canon or at least for most users it is a match. The differences are barely noticeable.

 

tkimages

Wammer
Wammer
Jun 14, 2006
10,732
9,306
173
St Helens
AKA
Tillman
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
There appears to be more curvature with the Tokina (see bottom of piano keys), having said that the Tokina does appear to take a nice photo. Be interesting to see how they compare wide open. I'm happy with my 17-40 as it fits in with my system, uses the same filter size, good construction. In my early photographic days, I had whatever lenses I could afford, which wasn't much, so I ended up with lenses that had different filter sizes, focussed in opposite directions, etc., it was a bit of a pain.

 

macvisual

Wammer
Wammer
Mar 6, 2008
5,147
1,489
158
Scotland
AKA
Peter
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Really can't tell the difference against the two lenses Richard. Tokina 19-35 seems a bargain alright.

 

Forum statistics

Threads
115,226
Messages
2,472,417
Members
70,573
Latest member
aiden.b

Latest Articles

Staff online